Citation Nr: 1038637
Decision Date: 10/14/10 Archive Date: 10/22/10
DOCKET NO. 07-21 841 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Paul,
Minnesota
THE ISSUES
1. Entitlement to service connection for cold injury residuals of
the right lower extremity.
2. Entitlement to service connection for cold injury residuals of
the left lower extremity.
3. Entitlement to service connection for cold injury residuals
of the right upper extremity.
4. Entitlement to service connection for cold injury residuals
of the left upper extremity.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: The American Legion
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Amy M. Smith
INTRODUCTION
The Veteran served on active duty from July 1953 to May 1955.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
on appeal from an April 2007 rating action of the Department of
Veterans Affairs Regional Office (RO) in St. Paul, Minnesota.
The case has been advanced on the docket.
The Veteran presented testimony at a Travel Board hearing chaired
by the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in September 2008. A
transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims folder.
This case was previously before the Board in June 2009, when the
Board denied service connection for cold injury residuals of the
bilateral upper and lower extremities. By Order dated in June
2010, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
(Court) vacated the Board's June 2009 decision, and remanded the
appeal to the Board in accordance with a Joint Motion for Remand,
filed by both parties in the case.
The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management
Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if
further action is required.
REMAND
The Veteran contends that the current disabilities of his
bilateral upper and lower extremities are the result of cold
weather injuries sustained while serving as an infantryman in
Korea in extremely cold temperatures and without adequate cold
weather protection.
A September 2008 private physician's statement indicates
pertinent treatment at Lakeview Clinic in Waconia, Minnesota
since 1993, and the physician's opinion that various conditions
of the Veteran's extremities are related to cold exposure in
Korea. On remand, the RO should attempt to obtain records of the
Veteran's treatment at this particular facility, since this has
not yet been accomplished.
Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:
1. After obtaining release forms from the
Veteran, and any other required
information, attempts should be made to
obtain records of treatment for his upper
and lower extremities at the Lakeview
Clinic in Waconia, MN, since 1993. All
attempts to obtain these records, and any
negative response, should be fully
documented.
2. If, and only if, records from the Lakeview
Clinic are obtained, return the claims
file to the March 2009 VA examiner. If
that examiner is not available, the claims
file should be referred to another
appropriate individual. After reviewing
the record in its entirety, including the
treatment records obtained from Lakeview
Clinic, the examiner is asked to express
an opinion as to whether any current
findings would change the previous
determination that the Veteran's
currently-shown conditions of the upper
and lower extremities are less likely than
not related to military service, including
cold exposure. A complete rationale
should be provided for all opinions
expressed. If it is necessary to re-
examine the Veteran, that should be
arranged.
3. Following completion of the above, the RO
should again review the record. If the
decision remains adverse to the appellant,
he and his representative should be
provided a supplemental statement of the
case and given an opportunity to respond
before the case is returned to the Board.
The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and
argument on the matter the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v.
West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law
requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or by the
Court for additional development or other appropriate action must
be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B,
7112 (West Supp. 2009).
_________________________________________________
MICHAEL E. KILCOYNE
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the
Board is appealable to the Court. This remand is in the nature
of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the
Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b)
(2009).